UC-NRLF 


■*J^ 


If  dottttprttrut  ffipagup  of  H^nmftt  Inff  rs 


% 


kcnship  Department  Bulletin 


January,  J 922 


tml  ^^rutr^  ani  Qlnnti^rttrut 


by 


Henry  W.  Farnam 

Professor  of  Economics,  Emeritus 

Yale  University 


An  Address 
before  the 

^tifaal  Bf  (HitxzmBifxp 

Conducted  with  the  Co-operation  of 

Yale  University 

October  24-28,  1921 


Published  by 

The  Connecticut  League  of  Women  Voters, 

721  Main  St.,      Hartford,  Conn. 


•  •  •  .  •  • 

•  •  •.•  •  • 


•  •    • 


^/^3  3x:<- 


P. 


W 


Gi 


Copyright  1922,    by  the 
CcHiflccticut  Le«gae  of  Women  Voters 


THE    CIVIL    SERVICE. 

By  Henry  W.  Farnam. 

A  Glance  Backwards. 

In  one  of  the  outlines  of  this  course  the  subject  of  civil 
service  reform  is  classified  among  the  "newer  ideas  in  govern- 
ment." Novelty  is  always  a  question  of  degree.  Readers  of 
Wells'  "Outline  of  History  need  not  be  told  that  the  whole 
recorded  history  of  the  race  is  new  compared  with  the  uncounted 
geological  eras  that  preceded  it.  Visitors  to  Great  Britain  know 
that  the  "New  Forest"  is  still  called  new  in  that  once  conserva- 
tive country,  although  it  was  established  by  William  the  Con- 
queror, so  that  the  word  new  in  that  case  means  over  800  years 
old. 

I  will  therefore  not  hint  that  the  ladies,  whose  literary  skill 
and  judgment  are  so  manifest  in  all  of  their  publications,  have 
made  an  inaccurate  statement  regarding  the  novelty  of  civil 
service  reform.  I  will  merely  interpret  their  phrase  by  saying 
that  the  official  recognition  of  this  reform  in  our  coun- 
try is  now  fifty  years  old;  that  the  political  principles  on  which 
it  is  based  were  recognized  by  all  of  our  earlier  presidents  and 
are  130  years  old;  while  its  ethical  standards  go  back  to  the 
decalogue,  since  any  one  who  accepts  a  salary  to  serve  the 
general  public  and  who  consciously  uses  his  time  and  the  labor 
of  his  subordinates  to  promote  the  interest  of  a  faction,  is  not 
scrupulously  observing  the  spirit  of  the  eighth  commandment, 
while  the  hungry  place  hunters  are  clearly  violating  the  tenth. 
It  is,  however,  true  that  the  decalogue,  or  at  least  the  observ- 
ance of  it,  is  new  to  some  people.  Indeed,  we  have  become 
acquainted  in  the  course  of  our  civil  service  fight  with  some 
influential  Connecticut  tories  so  conservative  that  the  ninth 
commandment  seems  to  them  an  irritating  and  radical  inno- 
vation. On  no  other  theory  can  I  account  for  their  persistency 
in  bearing  false  witness  even  after  the  truth  has  been  brought 
to  their  attention. 

I  regret  that  the  limitations  of  time  force  me  to  a  consider- 
able condensation.  If  I  were  a  scenario  writer  and  if  this  lecture 
were  to  be  popularized  by  reproduction  in  movie  form,  I  should 
throw  upon  the  screen  a  series  of  pictures  representing  the  early 
presidents  of  the  United  States,  from  George  Washington  to 
John  Quincy  Adams,  as  observers  of  the  principle  of  appoint- 
ment for  merit.     That  would  be  followed  by  a  picture  of  Senator 

—  3  _ 


MaiCjy.  jdf  N^w  York  standing  in  the  senate  and  proclaiming 
that  the  New  York  politicians  "see  nothing  wrong  in  the  maxim 
that  to  the  victors  belong  the  spoils."  Then  would  come  a 
picture  of  Jackson  applying  the  principle  in  practice;  pictures 
of  Daniel  Webster,  and  all  the  better  statesmen  of  the  next 
decade,  protesting  against  the  corruption  of  the  civil  service; 
the  funeral  procession  of  President  Harrison  whose  life  was 
sacrificed  to  the  importunities  of  place  hunters.  The  period 
following  the  Civil  War  would  be  featured  by  the  tragedy  of 
Garfield,  murdered  in  cold  blood  by  a  disappointed  office  seeker. 
Pictures  of  the  reformers  would  then  follow:  Representative 
Jenckes  of  Rhode  Island,  Dorman  B.  Eaton,  George  William 
Curtis,  and  those  who  embodied  reform  in  law,  such  as  Senator 
Pendleton,  the  author  of  the  Civil  Service  Act  of  1883,  and 
Senator  Hawley  of  Connecticut,  who  introduced  aifd  vigorously 
advocated  the  law  in  the  senate.  This  part  would  conclude 
with  the  portraits  of  every  president  from,  the  time  of  General 
Grant  on,  since  every  one  of  them  has  done  something  (some 
more,  some  less)  to  advance  the  application  of  the  merit  system. 

But  I  am  not  privileged  to  use  the  condensed  presentation 
of  the  movie,  and  as  it  would  take  too  much  of  my  short  time 
to  give  the  history  of  the  movement  even  in  outline,  I  will  pass 
at  once  to  the  practical  problems  of  the  present. 


The  Merit  System  Defined. 

You,  of  course,  all  know  what  we  mean  by  the  spoils  system. 
Its  evils  ere  three-fold: 

1.  Political.  It  Mexicanizes  politics  by  causing  elec- 
tions to  be  decided  more  by  the  activity  of  the  office  holders  and 
office  seekers  than  by  the  deliberately  formed  judgment  of  the 
electorate. 

2.  Administrative.  Office  holders  appointed  for  political 
service  are  inefficient  and  in  not  a  few  cases  corrupt. 

3.  Ethical.  The  system  is  unjust  to  the  tax  payer,  who  is 
certainly  entitled  to  get  his  money's  worth  in  public  service. 
It  is  equally  unjust  to  the  government  employees  who,  how- 
ever efficient  and  conscientious,  may  be  turned  out  at  any  time 
to  make  room  for  jpblitical  or  personal  friends  of  the  appointing 
officer. 

In  contrast  with  the  spoils  system,  what  has  now  come  to 
be  known  as  the  merit  system  is  one  "under  which  appointment 
to  and  retention  in  public  employment  depend  only  upon  proved 
capacity  to  perform  the  public  duties  involved."  This  defini- 
tion was  formulated  some  years  ago  by  Mr.  Morris  and  myself 

—  4  — 


in  an  attempt  to  express  the  gist  of  the  matter  in  twenty  words 
and  I  cannot  do  better  than  to  quote  it  here. 

If  every  officeholder  believed  in  and  lived  up  to  this  prin- 
ciple, it  would  be  unnecessary  to  pass  any  civil  service  laws. 
If  everybody  conscientiously  observed  the  Golden  Rule  we  should 
not  need  any  laws  against  theft  or  murder.  But  as  long  as  people 
do  not  live  up  to  these  principles,  we  have  to  make  laws  to  en- 
force them,  and  the  type  of  law  by  which  the  merit  system  is 
applied  is  simple  and  is  practically  the  same  everywhere.  First 
of  all  the  execution  of  the  law  is  put  in  the  hands  of  a  commission 
of  one  or  more  members.  This  commission  provides  for  com- 
petitive examinations  to  test  the  capacity  of  candidates  for  the 
various  positions  involved.  These  examinations  are  not  aca- 
demic, excepting  for  academic  positions.  They  are  practical 
and  have  to  do  directly  with  the  duties  required.  The  candi- 
dates are  marked,  usually  on  the  scale  of  100,  and  the  commission 
then  certifies  to  the  appointing  officer  the  names  of  those  who 
stand  highest  in  the  list.  It  has  become  customary  to  certify 
the  three  highest,  but  there  is  no  magic  in  the  number,  and  this 
is  merely  a  matter  of  convenience.  The  appointing  officer  then 
makes  his  selection  from  those  certified  and  the, person  selected 
is  appointed  on  probation  for  a  certain  time.  The  appointment 
is  made  definitive,  if  a  candidate  proves  acceptable,  but  a  defini- 
tive appointment  does  not  mean  a  life  tenure.  It  simply  means 
that  he  cannot  be  removed  except  for  cause,  and  it  is  custom- 
ary to  provide  that  this  cause  must  not  be  political  or  religious. 

Familiar  as  this  method  is  to  all  who  have  had  an3rthing  to 
do  with  the  system,  I  have  thought  it  best  to  describe  it  in 
outline,  because  of  the  many  misstatements  which  are  con- 
stantly being  printed  about  it  by  the  spoilsmen.  Kindly  note, 
therefore,  that  the  civil  service  commission  does  not  make  ap- 
pointments; it  merely  limits  the  range  by  weeding  out  the  least 
fit.  The  merit  system  does  not  diminish  the  responsibility  of 
the  office  holder,  who  must  still  exercise  his  discretion  both  in 
making  the  original  appointment  and  in  deciding  whether  or  not 
a  probationer  shall  be  retained.  It  does  not,  for  this  reason, 
weaken  discipline.  It  does  not  give  any  one  a  life  tenure. 
On  the  contrary,  it  gives  him  a  tenure  only  during  good  service . 

Under  our  system  of  government  there  are  three  quite 
distinct  spheres  of  political  power  and  three  classes  of  officials. 
We  thus  have  federal,  state,  and  local  governments,  each  with 
its  own  functionaries  and  as  a  matter  of  simplicity  I  shall  speak 
of  each  in  turn. 


—  5 


The  Federal  Service. 

It  is  in  the  federal  service  that  the  merit  system  has  made  the 
most  progress,  and  although  the  federal  government  sometimes 
seems  remote  from  the  individual  geographically,  in  point  of 
fact  we  touch  it  cons  aatly  in  our  business  and  in  our  pleasure, 
and  I  think  quite  as  frequently  as  the  local  or  state  govern- 
ment. Every  time  you  mail  or  receive  a  letter  you  are  dealing 
with  the  Post  Office  department  and  have  a  direct  interest  in 
prompt  service.  Every  time  you  pay  an  income  tax  or  a  tax 
on  theatres  or  soft  drinks  or  tobacco  you  touch  the  department 
of  Internal  Revenue.  In  a  less  obvious  way  you  are  constantly 
influenced  by  the  activities  of  the  federal  government  with 
reference  to  agriculture,  if  you  are  a  farmer;  with  reference  to 
labor  statistics  and  some  labor  laws,  if  you  are  a  wage  receiver; 
with  reference  to  the  work  of  the  consular  service,  if  you  are  an 
importer  or  exporter;  with  reference  to  inter-state  commerce 
regulation,  if  you  are  interested  in  railroads  either  as  a  director, 
a  stockholder,  or  a  passenger.  Instances  might  be  multiplied 
ad  infinitum. 

The  merit  system  in  the  federal  government  rests  at  present 
upon  the  so-called  Pendleton  Act  passed  in  1883  and  as  many 
people  do  not  seem  to  know  just  what  this  act  does,  I  must 
explain  it  at  the  start.  The  constitution  has  a  paragraph  re- 
lating directly  to  appointments  for  office.  After  providing 
for  the  appointment  of  justices  of  the  supreme  court  and  mem- 
bers of  the  diplomatic  service,  it  says  that  "Congress  may 
vest  the  appointment  of  such  inferior  officers  as  they  think 
proper  in  the  President  alone,  in  the  courts  of  law,  or  in  the 
heads  of  departments."  It  has  been  held  that  under  this  con- 
stitutional provision  it  would  be  illegal  for  Congress  to  restrict 
the  discretion  of  the  President;  therefore  the  civil  service  law 
simply  creates  a  commission  with  power  to  conduct  examina- 
tions for  candidates,  provides  for  its  financial  support,  lays  down 
certain  general  principles,  and  then  leaves  it  to  the  President 
to  make  rules  to  carry  them  into  effect.  In  the  words  of  the  act 
itself  it  is  the  duty  of  the  commissioners  "to  aid  the  President, 
as  he  may  request,  in  preparing  suitable  rules  for  carrying  this 
act  into  effect."  It  does,  however,  specifically  exclude  certain 
abuses.  It  provides  that  no  recommendation  of  any  person 
for  appointment  shall  be  made  by  any  senator  or  congressman 
except  as  to  the  character  or  residence  of  the  applicant,  and  it 
prohibits  political  assessments  or  contributions,  imposing  a  pen- 
alty upon  a  violation  of  these  provisions. 

Thus  the  application  of  the  merit  system  rests,  and  has 
rested  from  the  beginning,  entirely  upon  the  President. 

Beginning  on  a  very  modest  scale  this  system  has  been 

-6  — 


gradually  extended  until  in  the  single  year  1918  no  less  than 
213,000  appointments  were  made  under  it.  It  now  applies 
not  only  to  clerkships  and  other  minor  offices  to  which  it  seemed 
most  applicable  in  the  beginning,  but  it  has  come  to  include 
positions  involving  scientific  and  scholarly  attainments  (statis- 
tics, biology,  chemistry).  It  has  also  been  applied  to  consular 
offices,  to  the  diplomatic  service,  and  to  postmasterships  of  the 
first  class.  For  all  of  this  extension  we  are  indebted,  in  the 
main,  to  the  presidents  from  whom  the  rules  and  the  extension 
of.  the  system  proceeded. 

You  will  readily  see  that  with  so  many  different  positions 
under  civil  service  rules  and  with  the  enormous  extension  of 
government  activity  into  the  fields  of  research  and  science, 
into  the  regulation  of  railroads  and  health  and  labor,  many 
problems  are  constantly  presenting  themselves  for  solution  and 
new  regulations  and  new  laws  may  become  necessary  in  order 
to  adapt  to  modem  conditions  the  general  principles  of  good 
government  embodied  in  the  Pendleton  Act. 

I  shall  take  up  briefly  a  few  of  those  which  seem  to  me  most 
important  at  the  present  time.  They  concern  the  post  office 
department,  the  internal  revenue  and  prohibition  service,  the 
subject  of  veteran  preference,  and  the  general  reclassification 
of  the  service. 

The  Post  Office  Department  has  probably  gone  further 
in  the  application  of  the  merit  system  than  almost  any  other 
department  of  the  government.  Long  ago  we  reached  the  point 
at  which  the  bulk  of  the  clerks,  the  letter  carriers,  the  employees 
of  the  railway  mail  service,  etc.,  were  under  civil  service  rules 
and  more  recently  we  have  been  making  real  progress  in  extend- 
ing the  merit  system  to  postmasters.  A  beginning  was  made 
with  the  fourth  class  postmasters  by  President  Roosevelt  and 
President  Taft,  and  examinations  have  now  been  applied  suc- 
cessfully to  them  for  years.  It  was  a  bold  step  when  President 
Wilson  issued,  on  March  31,  1917,  an  executive  order  under 
which  he  determined  to  select  postmasters  of  the  first,  second 
and  third  classes  on  the  basis  of  merit  to  be  ascertained  by  an 
examination  into  the  candidate's  qualities  whenever  a  vacancy 
should  occur  on  account  of  death,  resignation,  or  removal. 

The  significance  of  this  action  was  such  that  it  has  been 
recognized  even  by  prominent  Republicans  who,  in  other  re- 
spects, have  allowed  their  minds  to  be  so  poisoned  by  the  venom 
of  the  late  campaign  that  they  did  not  think  that  any  good 
thing  could  come  out  of  Wilson.  It  must  be  understood  that  this 
order  was  a  purely  "self-denying  ordinance."  Under  the  con- 
stitution and  the  statutes  the  President  has  the  right  to  nomi- 
nate and  present  to  the  senate  for  confirmation  such  persons 
as  he  may,   in  his  discretion,   select.     In  this  case  President 

—  7  — 


Wilson  deliberately  elected  not  to  follow  the  advice  of  senators 
or  local  politicians  who  might  wish  to  further  their  political 
fortunes  by  putting  their  henchmen  into  office,  but  to  accept 
the  results  of  a  careful  inquiry  made  into  the  business  experience, 
administrative  ability,  and  general  character  of  candidates. 
That  this  rule  was  carried  out  impartially  and  in  good  faith  is 
indicated  by  the  fact  that  in  nearly  2,000  examinations  for 
postmasterships  held  in  the  northern  states,  over  800  Republi- 
cans and  only  600  Democrats  were  chosen  under  a  Democratic 
administration.  It  will  be  noticed,  however,  that  this  order 
had  its  limitations,  inasmuch  as  it  applied  to  vacancies  occurring 
only  through  death,  resignation,  or  removal,  but  not  through 
expiration  of  term. 

President  Harding,  I  am  glad  to  report,  although  strongly 
urged  by  party  associates  to  revoke  President  Wilson's  rule, 
has  issued  a  new  one  on  similar  lines.  It  differs,  however,  from 
the  former  in  two  particulars.  (1)  It  applies  to  all  vacancies, 
including  those  occasioned  by  expiration  of  term.  (2)  It  pro- 
vides that  the  Postmaster  General  shall  certify  to  the  President, 
not  the  highest:  name  on  the  list,  but  the  three  highest.  It  is 
clear  that  this  may  open  the  door  to  partisanship  and  that  even 
if  the  President  should,  in  fact,  select  the  man  at  the  head  of 
the  list,  there  is  danger  that  people  will  believe  that  he  is  going 
to  be  influenced  by  partisanship  and  that  very  few  Democrats 
will  apply.  The  order  is  still  new  and  a  final  judgment  cannot 
be  passed  upon  its  operation,  but  according  to  a  statement 
issued  by  the  Postmaster  General  on  September  10th,  it  appears 
that  a  total  of  878  nominations  had  been  made  under  the  terms 
of  the  order;  426  of  these  had  been  made' as  the  result  of  the 
promotion  of  the  employees  in  the  classified  service ;  the  balance, 
or  452,  were  made  from  eligible  lists:  and  of  these  345  were  the 
first  names  on  the  list,  75  were  the  second. 

The  Internal  Revenue  Department  is  less  satisfa<"torv. 
While  many  offices,  such  as  clerkships,  have  been  and  still  are 
classified  and  subject  to  the  civil  service  rules  in  the  case  of 
others  the  policy  has  fluctuated  and  certain  positions  have  at 
times  been  under  the  rules,  at  times  removed  from  them. 

The  classification  was  carried  to  its  furthest  point  by  Presi- 
dent Roosevelt  under  the  order  of  November  7,  1906,  when  all 
deputy  collectors  who  had  been  taken  out  of  the  competitive 
class  in  1903  were  restored  to  it.  Unfortunately,  an  act  of  Con- 
gress, approved  October  22,  1913,  specifically  allowed  collectors 
to  appoint  their  deputies  without  regard  to  the  civil  service 
act  and  this  opened  the  way  to  a  large  number  of  political  appoint- 
ments. ' 

—  8  — 


Partisanship  in  the  department  of  internal  revenue  is  pe- 
culiarly bad  because  of  its  power  to  penetrate  the  sanctity  of 
private  accounts,  in  assessing  the  income  tax,  as  well  as  through 
its  connection  with  the  collection  of  the  taxes  on  liquor  and  other 
articles  of  consumption. 

Closely  allied  with  the  internal  revenue  department  is  the 
enforcement  of  the  prohibition  law.  Liquor  laws  have  always 
been  peculiarly  difficult  to  apply.  Even  the  old  federal  tax 
law  was  frequently  violated  by  moonshiners  in  the  South,  and 
it  is  notorious  that  our  state  license  law  although  not  severe, 
was  not  strictly  executed.  Nevertheless,  when  the  most  radical 
piece  of  liquor  regulation  which  any  modern  country  has  ever 
adopted  was  put  upon  the  statute  book,  it  was  especially  pro- 
vided by  Congress  that  employees  should  not  be  under  civil 
service  rules.  This  was  done  in  spite  of  the  earnest  protest 
of  the  Civil  Service  Reform  League,  which  called  attention  in 
advance  to  the  evils  which  we  knew  would  result.  While  I 
do  not  claim  that  putting  the  employees  under  the  merit  system 
would  have  led  to  the  perfect  enforcement  of  the  law,  I  do  claim 
that  the  scandals  and  irregularities  which  have  arisen  under  it 
have  been  greatly  aggravated  by  the  absence  of  the  merit  system 

This  is  a  topic  which  concerns  women  as  a  sex  very  directly. 
It  is,  I  think,  unfortunately  true  that  the  pleasure  of  intoxication 
is  enjoyed  mainly  by  the  men,  while  the  suffering  which  results 
falls  mainly  upon  the  women  and  children.  Whatever  may  be 
one's  convictions  with  regard  to  prohibition,  or  any  particular 
method  of  regulating  the  liquor  traffic,  I  think  that  all  who  do 
not  make  money  by  selling  liquor  will  agree  that,  whatever  law 
is  on  the  statute  book,  it  should  be  carried  out  honestly,  im- 
partially, and  in  good  faith.  It  would  insult  my  audience  to 
argue  this  point. 

Veferan  Preference  has  become  a  problem  which  has 
arisen  not  only  under  the  federal  law  but  also  under  state  laws. 
This  is  a  familiar  device  for  weakening  the  civil  service  rules. 
It  was  abused  before  the  world  war  and  now  that  the  number 
of  veterans  has  increased  by  millions,  its  dangers  have  grown 
in  proportion.  The  Deficiency  Appropriation  Act  passed  July 
11,  1919,  made  a  provision  giving  unrestricted  preference  for 
clerical  and  other  positions  in  the  District  of  Columbia  and 
elsewhere  to  honorably  discharged  soldiers,  sailors  and  marines, 
and  the  widows  of  such,  and  also  to  the  wives  of  injured  soldier^, 
sailors  or  marines,  who  themselves  are  not  qualified  but  whose 
wiveS  are  qualified  to  hold  such  positions.  This  is  not  limited 
to  veterans  of  the  world  war,  but  applies  to  all  honorably  dis- 
charged veterans,  whether  they  have  ever  served  in  any  war 
or  not,  and  includes  army  field  clerks,  persons  who  served  in  the 

_  9  _ 


army  training  corps,  army  nurses,  pay  clerks,  men  and  officers 
of  the  revenue  cutter  service,  etc.  In  addition  to  this  sweeping 
preference  they  are  given  an  advantage  in  the  examinations 
since  the  passing  mark  which  for  others  is  70%  is  only  65%  in 
the  case  of  veterans.  The  abuse  connected  with  veteran  pref- 
erence is  particularly  liable  to  work  injustice  to  women  in  certain 
fields  for  which  women  are  best  qualified.  Take  as  an  example, 
the  examination  for  scientific  assistant  in  the  public  health 
service.  In  the  last  examination  there  were  two  veterans  who 
passed  with  averages  of  less  than  70%.  If  the  highest  veteran 
were  to  be  appointed,  he  would  be  selected  over  65  women 
whose  averages  were  70%  to  95%.  This  is  an  illustration  of 
the  injustice  of  this  law. 

The  veterans  of  all  wars  who  have  suffered  injury  or  disa- 
bility should  be  cared  for  liberally  at  the  expense  of  the  tax 
payer,  but  they  should  not  be  cared  for  at  the  expense  of  the 
efficiency  of  the  service  or  at  the  expense  of  fair  play  to  those 
who  have  qualified  themselves  for  government  positions  by  study 
and  education. 

Trade  unionism  among  federal  employees  is  another 
subject  which  is  liable  to  produce  trouble  in  the  future.  There 
is  no  logical  reason  why  this  should  be  necessary.  Uncle  Sam 
is  not  obliged  to  run  his  business  at  a  profit.  He  pays  his  way 
by  taxation;  he  is  like  the  spendthrift  son  of  a  rich  father  who, 
whenever  he  wants  more  mon€y,  goes  to  the  old  man  and  asks 
for  it,  the  old  man  in  this  case  being  the  patient  tax  payer. 
Uncle  Sam  should,  therefore,  be  an  ideal  employer.  Unfor- 
tunately, he  is  not,  and  the  inadequacy  of  salaries  in  many 
divisions  has  brought  about  the  formation  of  the  Association  of 
Federal  Employees,  which  is  now  affiliated  with  the  American 
Federation  of  Labor.  It  is  my  belief  that  most  of  the  employees 
have  no  desire  to  go  on  strike  or  to  engage  in  labor  agitation, 
and  that  all  danger  could  be  removed  by  provision  for  a  proper 
and  impartial  investigation  of  grievances  and  a  reasonable  ad- 
justment of  salaries. 

^  Reclassification  is  another  important  problem  now  before 
us  in  connection  with  the  federal  civil  service.  It  would  weary 
you  were  I  to  discuss  this  at  length.  I  will  merely  say  that 
in  the  course  of  years  the  federal  service  has  grown  rapidly 
until  it  has  become  a  veritable  maze.  New  offices  have  been 
created,  new  titles  introduced,  new  salaries  appropriated,  with 
little  reference  to  uniformity  or  system.  This  is,  of  course, 
not  the  result  of  the  merit  system,  but  a  proper  execution  of  the 
merit  system  demands  that  greater  consistency  and  uniformity 
shall  be  introduced.  Congress  has  been  studying  the  matter 
for  \^ears  and  a  special  expert  committee  of  the  Civil  Service 
Reform  League  has  made  a  valuable  report  upon  it. 

—  10  — 


The  State  Civil  Service. 

There  is  clearly  no  time  to  speak  of  the  civil  service  in  other 
states  than  Connecticut.  Stiffice  it  to  say  that  New  York  and 
Massachusetts  introduced  state  civil  service  laws  shortly  after 
the  passage  of  the  Pendleton  Act.  There  are  now  ten  states 
which  have  state  laws,  and  in  some  of  them,  as  New  York, 
Ohio  and  Colorado,  the  merit  principle  is  incorporated  in  the 
constitution. 

The  history  of  the  civil  service  in  Connecticut  is  a  study 
in  political  pathology.  It  has  all  of  the  interest  that  a  hospital 
has  for  a  physician.  It  is  a  very  good  illustration  of  how  not 
to  do  it.  As  the  details  have  been  recorded  at  some  length  in 
the  publications  of  the  Connecticut  Civil  Service  Reform  Asso- 
ciation, I  will  content  myself  with  giving  a  bare  outline,  only 
saying  that  my  statements  are  not  based  on  hearsay,  nor  upon 
memory,  nor  upon  the  imagination  vof  a  humorist,  but  upon 
contemporary  records.  They  have  this  advantage  over  many 
statements  which  you  may  have  heard  in  the  lobbies  of  the 
capitol  or  in  the  columns  of  a  very  few  newspapers. 

The  state  law  was  voted  by  the  legislature  of  1913.  It 
passed  both  houses  without  a  dissenting  vote,  and  it  was  advo- 
cated on  the  floor  of  the  senate,  both  by  the  Democratic  and  by 
the  Republican  leaders.  It  contained  nothing  radical  but  was 
similar  to  the  law  of  New  Jersey  and  of  other  states,  though  it 
differed  in  some  minor  particulars  from  the  bill  which  the  Con- 
necticut Association  had  been  advocating  for  some  four  years. 
Governor  Baldwin  appointed  an  excellent  commission  and  no 
criticisms  were  heard  of  the  law  until  after  the  elections  of  1914. 
Governor  Baldwin  was,  as  you  all  know,  a  Democrat,  and  of  the 
two  houses  the  Senate  had  a  Democratic  majority,  the  House, 
a  Republican.  In  1914  the  elections  gave  the  control  of  both 
houses,  as  well  as  the  governorship  and  the  other  state  offices,, 
to  the  Republican  party.  Before  the  elected  officials  had 
entered  upon  their  duties,  in  December,  1914,  Mr.  Morris  C. 
Webster,  the  comptroller-elect,  notified  the  superintendent  and 
assistant  superintendent  of  the  state  capitol  that  their  services 
would  not  be  required  after  January  6,  1915,  and  gave  to  the 
press  the  names  of  the  men  whom  he  proposed  to  appoint  in  their 
places.  This  was  so  obviously  a  violation  of  the  law  passed 
when  Mr.  Webster  himself  was  the  speaker  of  the  House,  that 
the  Attorney-General,  elected  upon  the  same  ticket,  declared 
his  action  to  be  illegal.  The  Hartford  C our  ant  then  began  its 
attack  upon  the  law,  declaring  editorially  on  January  8,  1915, 
fhat  "State  officers  responsible  for  their  departments,  should 
name  their  own  employees,  and  public  commissions  should  have 
the  same,  rights.**     And  it  added,    "It  may  be  partisanship, 

—  II  — 


but  it  is  human  nature  to  resent  seeing  a  candidate  of  the  Pro- 
gressive Party  and  a  life-long  Democrat  demand  that  a  Repub- 
lican comptroller,  elected  by  17,000  plurality,  ask  permission 
of  them  to  name  his  own  subordinates."  And  a  few  days  later 
it  said.  "Whatever  Mr.  Webster  may  have  done,  or  may  do, 
in  the  way  of  making  the  appointments  to  office  in  which  his 
responsibility  is  involved,  will  be  strictly  within  the  law  before 
Wednesday's  sun  sets." 

These  statements  are  very  important,  because  they  contain 
a  clear  acknowledgment  that  it  was  partisanship  which  led  to 
the  attack  upon  the  law,  and  that  the  movement  to  change  the" 
law  was  designed  to  legalize  an  act  clearly  illegal  on  the  part 
of  a  state  official  sworn  to  obey  the  law. 

Incidentally,  I  should  like  to  call  your  attention  to  the 
phrasing  of  this  quotation,  which  is  typical  of  much  that  we  have 
had  to  encounter  throughout  the  controversy.  The  editorial 
says  that  state  officers  "should  name  their  own  employees." 
The  implication  is  that  under  the  civil  service  rules  he  cannot 
name  his  own  employees.  As  I  explained  in  the  beginning,  the 
civil  service  rules  do  not  take  the  appointment  out  of  the  hands 
of  the  responsible  official ;  all  they  do  is  to  limit  the  appointment 
to  the  most  fit.  This  specious  plea  for  the  discretionary  power 
of  the  state  officer  or  commission  was  particularly  misleading 
in  the  case  of  Connecticut,  because  with  a  broadmindedness, 
which  is  worthy  of  all  praise,  the  Connecticut  rules  provided  that 
any  department  might  conduct  its  own  examinations,  as  long 
as  they  provided  proper  tests  of  fitness.  Thus  if  the  comp- 
troller, or  the  Cheshire  Reformatory  Board,  or  any  other  de- 
partment felt  that  the  examinations  of  the  commission  were 
unpractical,  or  arbitrary,  or  in  any  way  unsuitable,  they  could 
have  provided  for  their  own  tests.  But  this  they  never  at- 
tempted to  do.  It  is  clear  that  at  the  very  outset,  the  question 
was  not  whether  the  law  should  be  more  or  less  strict,  or  whether 
the  details  of  its  administration  might  be  improved.  It  was 
whether  the  state  should  recognize  the  principle  of  merit  %r 
that  of  partisanship  in  filling  ministerial  offices. 

The  controversy  over  the  civil  service  law  occupied  th^ 
attention  of  the  legislature  for  about  two  months.  Even  with 
a  good  majority,  it  was  clear  that  the  brutal  wiping  out  of  the 
whole  merit  system  was  too  much  for  the  dominant  party.  The 
leading  newspapers  of  the  state,  with  very  few  exceptions, 
supported  the  merit  system.  They  held  with  us  that  it  is  not 
necessary  that  a  man  shall  share  the  views  of  the  dominant 
party  on  the  tariff,  or  the  currency,  or  other  questions  of  national 
politics,  in  order  to  be  able  to  keep  the  state  capitol  clean  and 
warm.     We  claimed  that  there  was  not  a  Republican  method 

—  12  - 


of  housecleaning  distinguished  from  a  Democratic  method, 
and  that  an  honest  aiid  efficient  man  could  take  care  of  the 
state  capitol,  even  though  he  might  be  a  Democrat  in  poUtics 
or  even  a  Prohibitionist.  In  fact  the  experience  of  the  year 
proved  our  contention,  for  the  Democratic  superintendent 
could  not  be  removed  until  the  law  had  been  changed.  He 
thus  remained  in  office  for  two  months,  in  spite  of  the  fact  that 
he  did  not  share  the  political  views  of  Mr>  Webster,  and  during 
all  that  time  no  complaint  was  ever  heard  against  the  adminis- 
tration of  his  office.  You,  of  course,  understand  that  the  civil 
service  law  never  gave  an  office-holder  a  fixed  tenure.  It  merely 
provided  that  he  should  not  be  discharged  except  for  cause  and 
that  the  cause  should  not  be  political.  Mr.  Webster  could 
easily  have  removed  the  superintendent,  if  there  had  been  any 
complaint,  however  trivial,  of  his  work,  such  as  the  failure  to 
clean  out  the  spittoons  or  to  maintain  the  fire  in  the  furnace, 
and  there  would  have  then  been  no  violation  of  the  laWv  The 
fact  that  he  did  not  make  any  charge  whatever  is  the  best  proof 
that  no  charges  could  be  made  and  that  the  aim  was  to  make 
the  office  a  political  one. 

I  will  not  weary  you  with  the  details  of  the  discussion  in 
which  William  H.  Taft  and  many  of  our  leading  manufacturers, 
such  as  Mr.  F.  J.  Kingsbury,  Irving  H.  Chase,  the  late  George 
A.  Driggs  and  others  strongly  supported  the  contention  of  the 
Civil  Service  Refonn  Association.  The  outcome  was  the  passage 
of  the  so-called  Isbell  amendments,  the  general  effect  of  which 
was  to  make  the  law  optional.  For  while  retaining  the  commis- 
sion, it  provided  that  any  official  elected  by  the  people  could 
exempt  himself  from  the  operation  of  the  law  by  simply  declar- 
ing his  "policy,"  while  state  boards  and  commissions  could 
secure  exemption  by  obtaining  the  consent  of  the  governor 
without  any  reference  to  the  Civil  Service  Commission. 

A  feature  of  the  bill  which  showed  its  purely  partisan  char- 
acter was  the  provision  increasing  the  membership  of  the  com- 
mission from  three  to  five.  This  had  the  effect  of  giving  the 
Republicans  a  majority.  It  should  be  said,  however,  that  this 
has  played  no  part  whatever  in  the  civil  service  fight  in  Con- 
necticut. Though  all  of  the  governors  since  1915  have  been 
Republicans,  and  though  the  Republicans  have  for  six  years 
had  a  majority  on  the  Board,  all  of  the  men  appointed,  whether 
Republicans  or  Democrats,  have  been  men  of  high  grade,  and 
there  has  never  been  the  whisper  of  a  suggestion  that  they  have 
misused  their  office  for  partisan  purposes.  We  have  had  the 
interesting  experience  that  some  of  these  appointees  who  began 
by  being  rather  indifferent  to  the  merit  system  and  not  especially 
well  informed  upon  it,  became  its  strong  advocates,  after  they 

—  13  -~ 


had  seen  how  it  worked,  though  they  thus  put  themselves  in 
opposition  to  some  of  the  dominant  men  of  their  own  party. 

There  have  been  three  sessions  of  the  legislature  since  1915, 
In  1917  and  1919  our  association  made  an  effort  to  restore  at 
least  some  of  the  features  of  the  original  law  by  requiring  that 
any  requests  for  exemption  should  be  passed  upon  by  the  Civil 
Service  Commission  and  only  go  to  the  governor  on  appeal. 
We  failed  to  get  any  of  these  changes  made.  In  the  meantime 
'the  Civil  Service  Commission  was  carrying  on  its  work  effi- 
ciently, economically,  and  tactfully.  It  pursued  the  policy 
which  many  of  us  thought  wise,  though  it  proved  in  the  end  to  be 
futile,  of  commending  itself  to  the  public  by  proving  its  us.eful- 
ness  to  those  who  administered  the  affairs  of  the  state.  It 
succeeded  in  this  aim  to  such  an  extent  that  in  the  beginning 
of  1921,  although  every  department  of  the  state  might,  if  it  had 
wanted  to,  have  secured  exemption  by  asking  for  it,  inasmuch 
as  the  governor  had  never  denied  a  single  request  of  this  kind, 
only  nine  commissions  and  departments  had  been  exempted  as 
against  some  thirty-four  working  under  civil  service  rules,  and 
about  two-thirds  of  the  employees  of  the  state  were  still  ap- 
pointed after  competitive  examination,  carried  on  by  the  com- 
mission. In  two  cases  commissions  which  had  asked  for  and 
secured  exemption  from  the  governor  voluntarily  came  back 
under  the  system;  while  some  institutions  which  were  exempted 
applied  to  the  commission  for  permission  to  use  its  list  of  eligi- 
bles  in  filling  positions. 

To  have  brought  about  such  a  state  of  things  reflects  no 
small  credit  upon  the  commission  and  its  staff,  and  it  is  only 
right  that  in  this  place  I  should  mention  the  names  of  Com- 
missioners Charles  G.  Morris,  John  C.  Brinsmade,  Henry  G. 
Phelps,  Ulysses  G.  Church,  Hugh  M.  Alcorn,  William  Brosmith, 
Thomas  Hewes  and  C.  Denison  Talcott,  in  order  that  we  may 
give  them  full  credit  for  having,  conscientiously  and  without 
compensation,  carried  on  the  work  of  the  civil  service  department. 
To  these  should  be  added,  with  special  emphasis,  the  name  of 
Miss  Alice  R.  Taylor  who,  having  herself  been  appointed  as  the 
result  of  a  competitive  examination  under  application  of  the 
civil  service  rules,  managed  the  affairs  of  the  office  with  great 
tact  and  skill,  a  fact  generally  recognized  by  those  who  had 
dealings  with  the  commission. 

It  will  be  remembered  that  the  first  attack  upon  the  merit 
system  came  after  the  Republican  victory  of  1914.  The  second 
attack  came  after  the  Republican  victory  of  1920  when  but  a 
single  Democrat  found  his  way  to  the  senate  and  the  Republican 
majority  in  the  house  was  overwhelming.  The  very  first  bill 
introduced  in   the  house  by  the    house  leader,     Major  John 

—  14  ~ 


Buckley  of  Union,  was  a  bill  to  repeal  Chapter  105  of  the  Revised 
Statutes,  in  other  words,  the  entire  civil  service  law.  He 
secured  the  passage  of  this  under  the  familiar  parliamentary 
device  of  asking  for  a  suspension  of  the  rules,  which  meant  that 
the  bill  was  not  referred  to  any  committee  but  was  rushed  through 
without  debate,  before  many  of  the  members  knew  what  was 
involved,  and  sent  at  once  to  the  senate.  The  senate  showed  a 
greater  sense  of  fair  play  than  the  leader  of  the  house,  and  on 
motion  of  Senator  Delaney  of  Bridgeport  it  was  referred  to  the 
Judiciary  Committee. 

Senator  Bakewell  of  New  Haven  also  introduced  a  bill 
which  had  been  drafted  by  the  State  Civil  Service  Commission 
and  which  was  similar  to  the  bills  advocated  in  recent  years 
by  the  Civil  Service  Reform  Association  in  that  it  aimed  to 
stiffen  up  the  law  and  increase  the  dignity  of  the  commission  by 
providing  that  applications  for  exemption  should  be  acted  upon 
by  the  commission  in  the  first  instance,  subject  only  to  an  appeal 
to  the  governor.  A  well  attended  hearing  was  held  at  which  a 
large  number  of  influential  men  and  women  from  different  parts 
of  the  state  appeared  on  behalf  of  the  bill  to  strengthen  the  law. 
Almost  all  of  the  few  who  appeared  for  the  repeal  were  either 
officeholders  or  men  in  politics.  The  final  outcome  was  that  the 
Judiciary  Committee  recommended  the  rejection  of  the  Bakewell 
Bill  and  the  passage  of  the  bill  to  repeal.  After  a  short  debate, 
the  senate  ratified  this  action  by  a  vote  of  17-14.  As  was  stated 
at  the  time,  the  division  was,  in  fact,  closer  than  this  vote  indi- 
cated, and  there  is  every  reason  to  believe  that  had  it  not  been 
for  the  absence  of  certain  senators  the  result  would  have  been 
a  tie. 

Our  Association  made  a  final  effort  to  secure  reconsideration 
through  the  medium  of  a  petition  which  was  signed  by  many 
prominent  people,  mainly  Republicans,  throughout  the  state, 
received  the  endorsement  of  many  women  in  the  Connecticut 
League  of  Women  Voters,  and  was  introduced  by  Senator  Sey- 
mour of  Hartford.  It  was,  however,  not  passed  and  the  legisla- 
ture adjourned  with  the  repeal  of  the  civil  service  act  to  its  dis- 
credit. 

Two  points  are  to  be  noted  in  estimating  the  meaning  of 
the  repeal  of  the  civil  service  law. 

(1)  It  was  not  a  measure  of  the  Republican  Party  but  of  a 
faction  only.  As  no  vote  was  ever  recorded  in  the  house  and  as 
the  subject  was  never  debated  by  it,  we  cannot  say  definitely 
how  the  members  of  the  house  stood,  but  in  the  senate  all  of 
the  senators  present  from  New  Haven,  Hartford,  Waterbury, 
Meriden  and  Norwich,  and  one  of  the  three  from  Bridgeport, 
voted  for  the  retention  of  the  merit  system.  Likewise,  both  of 
the 'representatives  from  New  Haven,  Messrs,  Perry  and  Ford, 

-  15  - 


sustained  the  merit  system  whenever  occasion  offered,  and  Mr- 
Perry  rendered  us  great  service  as  a  member  of  the  Judiciary  Com- 
mittee. In  other  words  the  senators  from  the  large  cities  in  which 
the  problem  of  good  administration  is  best  understood  were  on 
the  whole  for  the  merit  system,  and  they  represented  nearly  half 
of  the  population  of  the  state.  But  it  is  fair  to  say  that  a  large 
majority  would  favor  the  merit  system  if  the  issue  were  put  before 
them  for  while  resolutions  were  passed  by  Rotary  and  Kiwanis 
Clubs  and  the  League  of  Women  Voters,  and  while  a  large  peti- 
tion was  circulated  in  favor  of  a  civil  service  law,  there  was  no 
popular  movement  against  it. 

(2).  The  law  having  already  been  made  optional  through 
the  Isbell  amendments,  its  repeal  did  not  mean  that  office  holders 
were  relieved  of  possibly  irksome  restrictions.  It  meant  that 
those  officials  who  wanted  to  run  their  offices  on  business  prin- 
ciples were  to  get  no  help  from  the  state  in  so  doing.  As  we 
repeatedly  showed,  some  of  the  best  managed  departments  of 
the  state  elected  to  be  under  the  merit  system,  and  such  men 
as  Highway  Commissioner  Bennett  and  Superintendent  of  Edu- 
cation Meredith,  testified  before  the  Judiciary  Committee  to 
the  advantage  which  they  found  in  the  merit  system. 

In  view  of  these  facts  you  naturally  ask  what  were  the 
arguments  for  repeal.  A  curious  feature  of  the  situation  was  that 
so  few  were  offered.  Mr.  Buckley  did  not  take  the  trouble  to 
present  any  when  he  rushed  bill  No.  1  through  the  house  under 
suspension  of  the  rules,  and  the  debate  in  the  senate  was  remark- 
able for  the  brevity  of  the  remarks  of  the  senate  leader. 

The  only  serious  argument  that  I  heard  was  that  such  a 
virtuous  state  as  Connecticut  did  not  require  any  civil  service 
law.  Some  people  said  that,  if  we  were  as  corrupt  as  New  York, 
they  would  be  strong  for  civil  service  reform,  but  that  in  a  good 
little  state  like  Connecticut  nothing  of  the  kind  was  needed.  It 
is  true  that  we  have  not  suffered  in  Connecticut  from  the  very 
gross  abuses  of  the  spoils  system  which  have  existed  in  some 
other  places.  We  have  never  had  our  governor  murdered  by  a 
disappointed  office  seeker.  The  spoils  system  has  not  corrupted 
our  state  philanthropic  institutions  and  even  among  the  depart- 
ments in  Hartford,  there  are  some  which  are  mana^^ed  on  a  non- 
partisan basis.    But  there  are  others  which  are  not.; 

The  very  incident  which  brought  about  the  agitation  in  1915 
involved  an  application  of  the  spoils  system,  and  the  law  was 
avowedly  changed  in  order  to  allow  the  comptroller  to  put  his 
own  man  into  office. 

The  final  repeal  of  the  civil  service  law  brought  to  light 
incidentally  another  application  of  the  spoils  system  in  one  of 
the  state  departments.   The  repeal  of  the  civil  service  law  threw 

—  16  — 


(tmt  of  work  the  employees  of  the  civil  service  office.  One  of 
them  aDplied  at  tliis  caDitol  department  for  a  clerical  position. 
According  to  a  statement  made  in  the  Hartford  Times  an  «^>ffi- 
c'al  tbe-e  said  to  her,  "What  are  your  politics?"  When  she  said 
that  she  did  not  know  much  about  politics,  he  said,  "Who  did 
you  vote  for  last  year?"  She  replied,  "I  voted  for  Harding.'^ 
Whereupon  he  remarked,  "That's  right,  it*s  just  as  well 
for  persons  around  here  to  vote  the  straight  Republican 
ticket."  Although  given  by  the  Times  an  opportunity  to  deny 
this  s:ory,  the  off'c'al  refused  to  do  so.  but  a  week  later  he  was 
quoted  in  the  New  Haven  Register  as  saying  that  the  statement 
was  incorrect.  His  own  words  as  printed  are:  "To  say  that 
membership  in  any  political  party  is  a  requirement  for  employ- 
ment in  any  of  the  positions  for  which  I  am  responsible  is  of 
course  absurd,  as  may  be  seen  fmm  the  fact  that  in  my  own 
office  organization  of  about  ten  people,  there  are  at  least  two  of 
opposite  political  faith  from  myself."  This  statement  which  I 
quote,  as  given  in  the  Register,  suggests  two  questions: 

ri).  If  he  did  not  inquire  into  the  party  affiliations  of  his 
appointees,  how  does  he  know  what  they  are? 

(2) .  If  he  pays  no  attention  to  politics  whv  do  the  Repub* 
licans,  according  to  his  own  statement,  hold  80%  of  the  offices 
under  him? 

These  two  cases  are  singled  out  because  they  happen  to  have 
been  the  subject  of  newspaper .  discussion,  but  there  are  plenty 
o^  other  cases  of  spoils  politics,  and  there  are  plenty  of  cases  of 
slacknes-s  which  a  good  civil  service  examination  would  help  to 
remedy.  While,  therefore,  it  is  true  that  we  are  not  as  bad  as 
we  might  be,  it  is  also  equally  true  that  we  are  not  as  good  as  we 
ought  to  be.  ]  But  all  this  really  had  no  bearing  upon  the  repeal  of 
the  law  as  it  stood  under  the  Isbell  amendments,  because  that 
law  did  not  require  any  one  to  be  better  than  he  wanted  to  be, 
nor  did  it  hamper  any  person  who  thought  that  he  could  test 
candidates  for  appointment  better  than  the  commission.  I  never 
heard  any  reason  given  for  depriving  those  who  wanted  to  run 
their  offices  on  a  non-partisan  business  basis  of  the  facilities  for 
doing  so. 

In  the  last  analysis  the  two  sides  of  the  civil  service  contro- 
versy run  parallel  to  the  two  sides  of  the  debate  between  the  wolf 
and  the  lamb  in  the  old  fable.  When  the  wolf  complained  that 
the  lamb  was  muddying  the  water  which  he  was  drinking,  the 
lamb  replied,  that  he  could  not  do  so,  since  he  was  further  down 
the  stream.  The  wolf  then  said,  "You  did  it  last  year."  To 
which  the  lamb  replied,  that  he  could  not  have  done  it  last  year, 
because  he  was  not  then  born.  "Well,"  said  the  wolf,  "It,  was 
your  brother  who  did  it."    "That,"  said  the  lamb,  "is  impossible, 

—  17  — 


because  I  have  no  brother."  "Well,"  the  wolf  said,  "I  am  going; 
to  eat  you  up  an5rway!"  ^  .^ 

The  first  complaint  was  that  a  Republican  of  fice  holder  could 
not  "bend  the  knee"  to  a  commission  which  consisted  of  one  Pro- 
gressive, one  Democrat,  and  only  one  Republican.  When  this 
objection  was  met  by  giving  the  Republicans  a  majority  of  three 
to  two,  we  were  told  that  the  rules  were  too  arbitrary  and  an 
interference  with  the  discretion  of  the  officeholders.  When  it 
was  pointed  out  that  the  law  has  been  so  modified  as  to  make  it 
practically  optional,  subject  only  to  the  consent  of  the  governor 
to  grant  exemptions,  we  were  told  that  the  law  was  so  weak  as 
to  be  a  farce  and  should  therefore  be  repealed,  and  that  the 
governor  ought  not  to  be  burdened  with  such  a  heavy  task  as 
granting  exemptions.  When  we  expressed  our  willingness  to 
relieve  him  of  this  task,  the  argument  was  actually  urged  in  the 
senate,  by  the  senate  leader,  that  he  could  not  consent  to  depriv- 
ing the  governor  of  this  privilege.  In  other  words,  the  wolf  had 
the  power  and  exercised  it. 


The  Civil  Service  in  Cities, 

To  make  the  story  complete  I  should  say  something  regard- 
ing the  merit  system  in  cities,  but  I  have  already  taken  up  so 
much  time  that  I  can  do  no  more  than  touch  upon  this  part  of 
the  subject.  In  the  country  at  large,  there  are  some  123  cities 
outside  of  Connecticut  and  Massachusetts  which  have  civil 
service  commissions  of  their  own.  Massachusetts  is  not  included 
in  this  list  because  the  recruiting  of  municipal  employees  is  in 
charge  of  the  state  commission.  A  list  of  cities  which  apply 
the  merit  system  would,  therefore,  be  much  greater  than  these 
figures  indicate.  In  Connecticut,  New  Haven  is  the  only  city 
which  has  a  complete  merit  system..  It  was  first  introduced  in 
the  charter  of  1898  and  has  been  in  operation  ever  since.  We 
have  had  our  lapses  and  there  have  been  times  when  the  com- 
mission itself  was  not  unjustly,  I  believe,  charged  with  partisan- 
ship. For  many  years  no  complaints  have  been  heard  and  under 
the  chairmanship  of  Mr.  E..  R.  Sargent,  and  with  Mr.  Eliot 
Watrous  and  Mr.  Charles  E.  P.  Sanford  as  the  other  members, 
the  law  is  judiciously  applied  not  only  to  the  police  and  fire 
departments,  but  to  practically  all  of  the  employees  of  the  city 
with  the  exception  of  the  teachers,  who  are  selected  under  tests 
applied  by  the  Board  of  Education. 

Some  other  cities  have  introduced  tests  covering  a  limited 
number  of  positions.  New  London,  New  Britain  and  Enfield  are 
in  this  class.  New  London  has  recently  adopted  the  city  manager 

-  18  - 


plan  and  as  that  always  implies  the  merit  system  of  appointment, 
it  is  undoubtedly  on  the  right  track. 

There  is  a  state  law  which  has  been  on  the  statute  books  for 
ten  years  which  makes  it  easy  for  any  municipaHty  or  any  other 
political  division  of  the  state  to  introduce  the  merit  system  by 
a  referendum  vote.  The  provisions  of  this  act  are  incorporated 
as  sections  2023-2D42  in  the  revised  statutes,  but  the  town  of 
Enfield  is  the  only  one  which,  as  far  as  I  am  informed,  has  made 
effective  use  of  it,  and  I  am  informed  that  the  repeal  of  the  state 
law  has  made  it  difficult  to  maintain  the  merit  system  in  Enfield, 
so  easily  does  the  lowering  of  standards  spread. 

The  Merit  System  and  Scientific  Progress* 

Before  concluding,  I  must  call  your  attention  to  the  peculiar 
character  of  the  civil  service  issue.  It  is  not  one  on  which  parties 
have,  as  a  rule,  been  divided  in  our  country  or  elsewhere^  There 
are  no  great  economic  interests  involved,  as  in  the  case  of  the 
tariff,  the  currency,  the  banks,  the  railroads,  the  labor  question; 
hence  we  have  the  peculiar  situation  that  for  some  fifty  years 
both  national  parties  have,  with  few  exceptions,  declared  in  their 
party  platforms  for  the  merit  system.  As  a  consequence,  the 
question  very  seldom,  if  ever,  is  put  to  a  popular  vote,  unless  on 
a  proposition  to  insert  a  civil  service  clause  in  a  state  constitution, 
and  in  every  case  in  which  such  an  amendment  has  been  laid  before 
the  people,  they  have  adopted  it.  Therefore  our  main  task  con- 
sists in  persuading  public  men  to  live  up  to  their  party  pro- 
fessions, which  means  that  we  have  to  work  to  secure  proper 
laws  to  extend  the  merit  system,  and  when  the  laws  are  passed 
we  have  to  see  to  it  that  our  officials  execute  them  in  accordance 
with  their  spirit.  In  short,  if  we  view  the  matter  in  its  broader 
aspects  we  see  that  the  movement  for  a  better  civil  service  is  a 
phase  of  the  general  application  of  science  to  the  affairs  of  life, 
as  exemplified  more  particularly  in  the  development  of  engineer- 
ing, of  chemistry,  of  scientific  agriculture,  of  medicine  and  public 
health.  The  old  fashioned  idea  of  using  strong  drugs  as  specifics 
for  a  particular  disease  is  rapidly  giving  away  to  prophylactic 
medicine.  With  the  knowledge  that  many  ailments,  if  not  all,  are 
caused  or  aggravated  by  failure  to  keep  the  body  clear  of  microbes 
and  poisons  and  other  harmful  invaders,  the  physicians  are  giving 
more  and  more  attention  to  nursing,  and  less  to  the  pharma- 
copoeia. This,  however,  involves  training  in  chemistry  and 
bacteriology,  and  nursing. 

In  the  pioneer  days  when  every  settler  had  to  be  a  jack  of 
all  trades,  it  was  a  common  belief  that  any  man  could  easily  fill 
any  office  to  which  the  people  saw  fit  to  call  him,  just  as  almost 
any  man  could  treat  disease  by  giving  drugs.  To  a  certain  extent, 
this  was  true.  At  least  he  could  fill  the  office  to  the  satisfaction 

—  19  ~ 


of  those  who  elected  him.  It  is  no  longer  true  at  the  present  day. 
It  is  no  more  true  that  an}?-  one  who  has  push  and  gumption  and 
a  certain  adaptability  is  qualified  to  fill  public  office  than  it  is 
true  that  "Sairey  Gamp''  could  do  our  nursing  satisfactorily. 
To  keep  pace  with  science  and  with  the  increasing  need  of  scien- 
tific work,  as  a  part  of  our  government  it  is  absolulely  necessary 
that  we  shall  have  trained  and  carefully  selected  officials  to  do 
the  work.  The  day  of  the  political  "Sairey  Gamp"  is  over, 
although  there  are  quite  a  few  men  of  influence  in  the  state  who 
do  not  realize  it. 

As  nursing  is  best  done  by  women,  and,  in  general,  the  task 
of  keeping  the  world  clean  usually  falls  upon  them,  so  it  seems  to 
me  that  they  are  peculiarly  fitted  to  maintain  the  administration 
in  a  clean  and  healthy  condition.  They  also  have,  as  a  sex,  a 
special  interest  in  the  results  of  the  merit  system.  The  execution 
of  factory  laws,  the  protection  of  labor  of  women  and  children, 
the  maintenance  of  sanitary  conditions,  the  enforcement  of 
liquor  laws,  all  require  the  merit  system,  and  failure  to  put 
properly  trained  people  into  the  services  dealing  with  these  topics 
will  react  directly  upon  the  welfare  of  women,  as  well  as  upon 
that  of  the  community  at  large. 

Therefore  as  far  as  women  have  special  interests  apart  from 
men  or  as  far  as  they  may  have  special  aptitudes  different  from 
those  of  men,  the  subject  of  civil  service  reform  is  one  which 
should,  and  I  know  does,  appeal  to  them  strongly.  I  may 
observe  parenthetically,  however,  that  the  more  experience  I 
gain,  the  mose  distrustful  I  am  of  the  broad  generalizations  in 
which  so  many  people  indulge  regarding  the  peculiar  psychology 
of  women,  or  other  sex  attributes.  Most  men  are  just  stupid 
enough  to  generalize  from  their  own  experience.  The  man  whose 
wife  is  nervous  and  emotional  is  very  apt  to  believe  that  woman 
is  "uncertain,  coy  and  hard  to  please,  and  variable  as  the  shade 
by  the  light  quivering  aspen  made."  The  man  whose  wife  is 
domineering  and  pushing,  is  sure  that  "the  female  of  the  species 
is  more  deadly  than  the  male."  We  are  often  told  that  women  are 
unbusinesslike,  and  yet  in  my  experience  with  philanthropic 
organizations  I  have  found  that  many  of  those  which  are  best 
managed  are  managed  by  women.  We  are  told  that  women  are 
temperamental  and  unstable,and  yet  they  have  shown  an  amount 
of  calm  judgment  and  farsightedness  in  fitting  themselves  for 
their  political  duties  which  very  few  individual  men  and  no  group 
of  men  have,  as  far  as  I  know,  ever  displayed. 

I  wish  that  the  example  set  by  your  League  could  be  followed 
by  groups  of  young  men,  who  are  also  about  to  vote  for  the 
first  time,  and  who  need  far  more  than  the  women  of  the  League 
to  inform  themselves  regarding  the  questions  which  they  will 
help  decide. 

-  20  - 


Practical  Steps. 

I  have  tried  to  sketch  the  present  status  of  the  merit  system 
under  the  federal  government  and  in  our  state,  but  I  understand 
that  you  desire  to  have  me  say  something  regarding  the  practical 
steps  which  the  League  of  Women  Voters  can  take  to  help  for- 
ward the  movement. 

The  kind  of  work  which  I  have  described  can  be  effective 
only  if  carried  on  through  some  organization.  Knight  errantry 
is  as  much  out  of  date  in  politics  as  in  war,  and  we  are  fortunate 
in  having  both  national  and  state  organizations  working  for  the 
reform  of  the  civil  service.  The  Connecticut  Civil  Service  Reform 
Association  is  a  branch  of  the  National  Civil  Service  Reform 
League  organized  forty  years  ago.  It  is,  I  believe,  the  oldest 
organization  working  for  civic  or  social  betterment  in  the  country. 
Since  it  was  formed,  many  other  societies  have  come  into  exis- 
tence, such  as  the  National  Municipal  League,  the  Civic  Asso- 
ciation, the  Short  Ballot  Organization,  the  Association  for  Labor 
Legislation,  the  American  Public  Health  Association,  the  Child 
Hygiene  Association,  etc.  These  are  all  younger  and  deal  with 
specific  needs.  The  Civil  Service  Reform  Associations  deal 
with  something  which  is  fundamental  to  them  all,  for  you  cannot 
profit  by  good  health  laws,nor  labor  laws,  nor  a  good  city  charter, 
unless  you  are  sure  that  those  who  have  the  execution  of  the  laws 
will  be  appointed  for  merit,  and  I  doubt  if  you  will  find  any  or- 
ganization which  has  accomplished  such  far  reaching  results  on 
such  a  very  modest  budget,  and  in  such  a  quiet  and  effective  way 
as  the  National  League.  We  have  by  no  means  reached  our  ob- 
jective, but  we  have  accomplished  many  things  which  we  our- 
selves should  have  thought  impossible  when  we  began.  Our 
success  has  been  due,  I  think,  primarily  to  the.  fact  that  the 
movement  is  based  upon  ethical  and  political  principles  so  sound 
that  both  parties  have  officially  endorsed  them,  however  far 
individual  members  of  those  parties  may  have  strayed  from  the 
straight  and  narrow  path.  A  further  reason  for  our  success  is 
that  we  have  adhered  to  our  one  aim  consistently  and  persis- 
tently. We  have  not  allowed  ourselves  to  be  discouraged  by 
abuse,  ridicule,  or  misrepresentation.  We  have  not  tried  to  tie 
up  with  any  selfish  interests.  We  have  stood  from  the  beginning 
for  what  we  believedto.be  right !  The  National  League  may  be  said 
now  to  consist  of  a  body  of  men  and  women,  many  of  whom  are 
experts  in  the  subject  of  the  civil  service.  Through  our  office 
in  New  York  we  are  kept  informed  of  the  various  movements  to 
improve  the  present  law,  as  well  as  of  the  various  attempts  to 
undermine  or  weaken  it.  We  publish  a  monthly  paper  called 
Good  Government  which  is  our  organ  and  which  helps  to  keep  us 
posted.  With  a  minimum  of  labor,  the  member  can  inform  him- 
self easily  on  the  subject,  and  by  writing  or  speaking  to  congress- 

—  2i  — 


men,  members  of  the  state  legislature,  and  administrators,  make 
kis  influence  felt  on  behalf  of  what  is  right.  There  is  no  more 
practical  way  to  further  the  cause  of  good  government  than  to 
join  the  Connecticut  Civil  Service  Reform  Association  and^ 
through  it,  the  National  League. 


-  22 


14  DAY  USE 

RETURN  TO  DESK  FROM  WHICH  BORROWED 

LOAN  DEPT. 

This  book  is  due  on  the  last  date  stamped  below,  or 

on  the  date  to  which  renewed. 

Renewed  books  are  subjea  to  immediate  recall. 


30Nov'63WW 


RECP  LP 


ULC    2'63-l2M 


LD  21A-40m-4,'63 
(D6471sl0)476B 


General  Library 

University  of  California 

Berkeley 


Photomount 

Pamphlet 

Binder 

Gaylord  Bros. 

Makers 

Syracuse,  N.  Y 

PAT.  JAN  21,  1908 


Far nam,  H. 
Connecticut 


?e  and 


^^  »^  V  x-r 


f 


K3355 
3 


o39Cr7 


f3 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


^m^^es-:^ 


